Our results worryingly show that academics who publish with a larger proportion of female co-authors are less cited.
Because articles written by women have been found to be less cited than articles written by men [2, 6], we expect to find that articles by women are less cited than articles by men.
Moreover, we assume, other things being equal, that articles written by females are less cited than articles written by men.
In addition, when women collaborate with the same number of co-authors as men, or target similar Impact Factor journals, their articles are less cited then those of their male colleagues.
Another reason is that Asian regional journals, particularly in their native languages, tend to be less cited by English-speaking researchers because of the extra effort of translation.
The simple comparison of Figure 4 needs also to take account of the mean RL of papers from each area, and, when this is done, a different pattern emerges, with EH=Edinburgh, OX=Oxford and CB=Cambridge forming an axis of excellence (on this indicator) and other areas' output being less cited on guidelines.
Radio is less often cited as a factor.
Cream is an oft-cited early example (Eric Clapton, Ginger Baker, and Jack Bruce), while Asia (members of King Crimson, Yes, and Emerson Lake and Palmer) is a later example that is, thankfully, less cited.
Friends and relations (14%), radio (13%) and magazines (6%) were less often cited.
Unprotected sex was less commonly cited, and no one mentioned male-male sex.
